Crosman Model 362 MSP.22 CAL.
Hello to all;
I had read a little about the new Crosman 362 MSP rifle; some good some not so good, at any rate I decided to see for myself and ordered one for $99.99 from PA.
Received the unit in good order; specs were as follows; OAL length 36.5 inches, single shot bolt action; weight 5.0 lbs., MSP 3-8 PUMPS , (max velocity 875FPS WITH ALLOY PELLETS) , Synthetic stock/pump arm, rubber butt pad, , .22 cal. bolt action, push button safety located on trigger guard.
The rifle looked ok, sleek lines, some big checkering on the pump arm. Rear sight could be used in the peep sight position or rotated to regular square notch rear sight position, and was adjustable for elevation and windage. When I opened the pump arm for the first time I immediately noticed something, the rear bottom of the metal pump lever was bent in an odd configuration??? The metal pump lever is a thin u shaped configuration set inside a slot in the synthetic forearm and attached with two screws, upper and lower..
When this rifle was assembled at the factory the lower screw pulled the off side of the u shaped metal pump arm completely together with the opposite side!! I will include a photo which will clarify my attempt to describe the situation! At any rate this Rifle should have never left the factory in this condition period!!!!!! As I understand it Crosman claims that they are making this rifle stateside, I don’t know, maybe, but this looks like something straight out of China, geesh!!!!!!!!! (The barrel was also absolutely filthy, another pointer indicator of China!!) Ok why did this happen with the pump arm? Two things, the holes in the metal pump arm were too small and the wrong type screws were used, full length threads on the screws should not have been used: rather screws with threads on the end of the screws only!!! When the screw was tightened; because of the undersized hole, it actually threaded the off side of the metal pump arm and pulled the two sides together like a clamp!! In order for this to happen the metal pump arm has to be made from very soft metal, not good!!!*(One other note when pumping this unit it has the loudest CLACKING NOISE WHEN THE PUMP ARM IS RETURNED THAT I HAVE EVER HEARD ON A MSP RIFLE!!! ) I reduced it somewhat by taking a trimmed piece of 1/16 doubled side tape with one side of the tape protector removed and placing it on the contact point of the receiver !!!!!! )
Some will say; why did you not send it back?? Fair enough , I felt at this point it was not worth it to me or my time, as I would probably get another with similar issues, I will just move forward with testing and see what else I run into!
I utilized Crosman PMHP 14.3 gr. for all velocity tests. Crosman recommends 3-8 pumps maximum, I will use 3, 5 and 8 pumps for these test. “No Alloy Pellets!!!”
3/pumps = AV- 473 fps-7.1ft. lbs.
5/pumps =AV-575 fps-10.5 ft.lbs.
8/pumps =AV-655 fps-13.5 ft. lbs.
These are very good numbers in my view and attest to a good balanced valve system.
Next will be the accuracy testing which will be conducted at 15 yds. Using the Crosman PMHP 14.3 gr. Pellets, testing will be done from a bench rest.
The M-362 delivered 5 shot groups of 1.0”- c-c, utilizing 5 pumps, which is what I will use for this rifle; (575 fps & 10+ ft. lbs), is good enough for me! Eight pumps delivered 5 shot groups of 1.15” c-c. For me; it is just not worth the extra 3 pumps!! Others may disagree!!
This rifle is in my view a simple backyard plinker ; designed to meet a perceived COST in the market ! Consider that Crosman utilized plastic/polymer in “ALL” areas except those that “absolutely required metal” even the breech is plastic!!! I have read that others have replaced the plastic breech with a steel breech from the 1300 series Crosman units as well as different sights etc; when one does these type upgrades you are looking at another $100 bucks are so, one is in the $200 dollar range now! Might be worth it to some, but not with bent pump arms!!!!
I must say at this point I could not in good conscious recommend this rife for purchase considering the items that I pointed out; others I am sure may disagree!! The power /accuracy were acceptable but bent pump arms are NOT!!
Some may view this as Crosman bashing, it is not, I am a big Crosman fan; I have some 80+ air guns in my collection, fully 65% are Crosmans!! My favorite is the 1952-1954 bulk fed CO2 Rifles model 113,114 and 118 of which I have; 15-M- 114, 4- M-113 and 1- M-118 repeater, my all time favorite!!
Crosman can do better, in my opinion!!!!!!!
I have to apologize. For some reason I could not attach the photos. If you are interested you can send me your email and I will send you the photos that go with this article.
Garey
Hello to all;
I had read a little about the new Crosman 362 MSP rifle; some good some not so good, at any rate I decided to see for myself and ordered one for $99.99 from PA.
Received the unit in good order; specs were as follows; OAL length 36.5 inches, single shot bolt action; weight 5.0 lbs., MSP 3-8 PUMPS , (max velocity 875FPS WITH ALLOY PELLETS) , Synthetic stock/pump arm, rubber butt pad, , .22 cal. bolt action, push button safety located on trigger guard.
The rifle looked ok, sleek lines, some big checkering on the pump arm. Rear sight could be used in the peep sight position or rotated to regular square notch rear sight position, and was adjustable for elevation and windage. When I opened the pump arm for the first time I immediately noticed something, the rear bottom of the metal pump lever was bent in an odd configuration??? The metal pump lever is a thin u shaped configuration set inside a slot in the synthetic forearm and attached with two screws, upper and lower..
When this rifle was assembled at the factory the lower screw pulled the off side of the u shaped metal pump arm completely together with the opposite side!! I will include a photo which will clarify my attempt to describe the situation! At any rate this Rifle should have never left the factory in this condition period!!!!!! As I understand it Crosman claims that they are making this rifle stateside, I don’t know, maybe, but this looks like something straight out of China, geesh!!!!!!!!! (The barrel was also absolutely filthy, another pointer indicator of China!!) Ok why did this happen with the pump arm? Two things, the holes in the metal pump arm were too small and the wrong type screws were used, full length threads on the screws should not have been used: rather screws with threads on the end of the screws only!!! When the screw was tightened; because of the undersized hole, it actually threaded the off side of the metal pump arm and pulled the two sides together like a clamp!! In order for this to happen the metal pump arm has to be made from very soft metal, not good!!!*(One other note when pumping this unit it has the loudest CLACKING NOISE WHEN THE PUMP ARM IS RETURNED THAT I HAVE EVER HEARD ON A MSP RIFLE!!! ) I reduced it somewhat by taking a trimmed piece of 1/16 doubled side tape with one side of the tape protector removed and placing it on the contact point of the receiver !!!!!! )
Some will say; why did you not send it back?? Fair enough , I felt at this point it was not worth it to me or my time, as I would probably get another with similar issues, I will just move forward with testing and see what else I run into!
I utilized Crosman PMHP 14.3 gr. for all velocity tests. Crosman recommends 3-8 pumps maximum, I will use 3, 5 and 8 pumps for these test. “No Alloy Pellets!!!”
3/pumps = AV- 473 fps-7.1ft. lbs.
5/pumps =AV-575 fps-10.5 ft.lbs.
8/pumps =AV-655 fps-13.5 ft. lbs.
These are very good numbers in my view and attest to a good balanced valve system.
Next will be the accuracy testing which will be conducted at 15 yds. Using the Crosman PMHP 14.3 gr. Pellets, testing will be done from a bench rest.
The M-362 delivered 5 shot groups of 1.0”- c-c, utilizing 5 pumps, which is what I will use for this rifle; (575 fps & 10+ ft. lbs), is good enough for me! Eight pumps delivered 5 shot groups of 1.15” c-c. For me; it is just not worth the extra 3 pumps!! Others may disagree!!
This rifle is in my view a simple backyard plinker ; designed to meet a perceived COST in the market ! Consider that Crosman utilized plastic/polymer in “ALL” areas except those that “absolutely required metal” even the breech is plastic!!! I have read that others have replaced the plastic breech with a steel breech from the 1300 series Crosman units as well as different sights etc; when one does these type upgrades you are looking at another $100 bucks are so, one is in the $200 dollar range now! Might be worth it to some, but not with bent pump arms!!!!
I must say at this point I could not in good conscious recommend this rife for purchase considering the items that I pointed out; others I am sure may disagree!! The power /accuracy were acceptable but bent pump arms are NOT!!
Some may view this as Crosman bashing, it is not, I am a big Crosman fan; I have some 80+ air guns in my collection, fully 65% are Crosmans!! My favorite is the 1952-1954 bulk fed CO2 Rifles model 113,114 and 118 of which I have; 15-M- 114, 4- M-113 and 1- M-118 repeater, my all time favorite!!
Crosman can do better, in my opinion!!!!!!!
I have to apologize. For some reason I could not attach the photos. If you are interested you can send me your email and I will send you the photos that go with this article.
Garey
....it would be cheaper
